NJ LAWMAKERS ANNOUNCE PLANS TO DESTROY RIGHT TO CARRY

[1LtCAP 4,263]

1 hour ago, bennj said:

I don't know about that, isn't a mailbox technically government property? So we used to be able to go to the mailbox, now we have to unholster and leave it on the property while we retrieve the mail? If passed, it states a thumb break is permissible, I was planning on gluing a strip of velcro with snaps attached to my current holsters so I should be good to go ( insert sarcasm doohicky here).

in my case, my mailbox is inside my fenceline.

 

 that said.....if i'm responsible for the sidewalk..........

[BigGuns 262]

2 hours ago, 1LtCAP said:

we could do that before too

Exactly. But now they spent hundreds of dollars getting a permit to do the same thing.

[Xtors 333]

6 hours ago, Carolina Native said:

Safariland 575

https://safariland.com/products/model-575-iwb-gls-pro-fit-holster-model_575

Interesting, except they don't make it for what I own...

[Old Glock guy 1,127]

In the videos, the bill's sponsor is asked repeatedly, "So where can people carry weapons?"  To which he replies, "I wouldn't feel comfortable having people carrying here, and I wouldn't feel comfortable having people carrying weapons there."  Well, excuse me, but F his comfort!  He is in the legislature representing us to protect and defend the Constitution, not to make himself feel more comfortable. 

[1LtCAP 4,263]

where he feels comfortable or not is irrelevant.

[Displaced Texan 11,748]

Bruen clearly calls out, for example, that the ‘island of Manhattan can’t be called a ‘sensitive area’ simply because it’s crowded’. 
 

By the same token, most of NJ cannot be called a sensitive area, simply because some legislators aren’t comfortable with having firearms ‘near them’. Fuck that. 
 

I imagine, like most other states, polling places, large venues (such as a pro sports, or concert venue), schools, and govt buildings will be held as sensitive areas. 
That I can see. 
 

Making everywhere but your own yard an exclusion zone ain’t gonna fly. 
 

[1LtCAP 4,263]

i'm torn on the polling places and large venues thing. we're either trusted as legal gun owners or we're not. that said, people do stupid shiit when they drink....and they always seem to drink in excess at sporting events. and concerts. i can't come up with an excuse at polling places.

[voyager9 3,434]

1 hour ago, 1LtCAP said:

that said, people do stupid shiit when they drink....

Careful.  That’s only a slight detour to allowing the ban on carrying at bars or anyplace that serves alcohol. 

[b47356 21]

54 minutes ago, voyager9 said:

Careful.  That’s only a slight detour to allowing the ban on carrying at bars or anyplace that serves alcohol. 

Have you read the bill?

5.    (New section) Safe carry requirements for authorized holders of a permit to carry a handgun.

     a.     The holder of a permit to carry a handgun issued pursuant to N.J.S.2C:58-4 shall not:

     (1) use or consume alcohol, a cannabis item, or a controlled substance while carrying a handgun;

     (2) be under the influence of alcohol, cannabis, or a controlled substance while carrying a handgun;

[...]

   7.    (New section) Places where the carrying of a weapon is prohibited.

     a.     Except as otherwise provided in this section, it shall be a crime of the third degree for any person, other than ²[a person lawfully carrying a firearm within the authorized scope of an exemption set forth in N.J.S.2C:39-6 and only to the extent permitted by the entity responsible for security at the place in question] an active or retired law enforcement officer in accordance with subsection f. of this section², to knowingly carry a weapon, as defined in subsection r. of N.J.S.2C:39-1, in any of the following places, including in or upon any part of the buildings, grounds, or parking area of:

[...]

(15) a bar or restaurant where alcohol is served, and any other site or facility where alcohol is sold for consumption on the premises;

 

https://www.njleg.state.nj.us/bill-search/2022/A4769/bill-text?f=A5000&n=4769_R2

 

[1LtCAP 4,263]

57 minutes ago, voyager9 said:

Careful.  That’s only a slight detour to allowing the ban on carrying at bars or anyplace that serves alcohol. 

yea i know, that's why i'm torn on it.

 

 my basic premise is that if i trust you to walk amongst me and those i love then i can trust you with a firearm. if i can't trust you with a firearm, then i need to know why you're not still in prison.

 

 not you personally, but you get the point.....

[Tunaman 549]

I'll put 2 small screws and a fuckin' rubber band.

[Mike77 169]

4 hours ago, Displaced Texan said:

Bruen clearly calls out, for example, that the ‘island of Manhattan can’t be called a ‘sensitive area’ simply because it’s crowded’. 
 

By the same token, most of NJ cannot be called a sensitive area, simply because some legislators aren’t comfortable with having firearms ‘near them’. Fuck that.

 

I'm not comfortable with a man, wearing a dress, in a girl's bathroom.......

But let's not get off subject.

[Mrs. Peel 7,157]

4 hours ago, Old Glock guy said:

In the videos, the bill's sponsor is asked repeatedly, "So where can people carry weapons?"  To which he replies, "I wouldn't feel comfortable having people carrying here, and I wouldn't feel comfortable having people carrying weapons there."  Well, excuse me, but F his comfort!  He is in the legislature representing us to protect and defend the Constitution, not to make himself feel more comfortable. 

Even worse, his statements (and the whole bill) show a profound (and perhaps purposeful?) ignorance of the realities of crime. How can someone who knows so little about crime be the sponsor of a bill like this?   I could show you dozens of crime studies, all from credible sources - Fed, State, universities - and they ALL will show the same damn thing - ex-felons are committing on average about 70% of gun crimes (and other serious crimes too), then the 2nd largest group (another 15-20+% depending on the study) are people who also did something wrong previously (either they had a string of misdemeanors, or they got the gun illegally, etc.). Legal gun owners contribute a scant amount to crime - that's just a fact - most studies show that group to be in the single digits in terms of contributing to crime. They are statistically a non-issue.

A bill like this one also conveniently ignores that defensive gun uses in this country are measured (at minimum) in the hundreds of thousands, with some studies showing them to be in the millions.

So, when a nimrod politician like this is talking about what makes him feel "comfortable" - well, it just about makes my head explode. He's operating from a position of pure ignorance. The reality is that a law like this will have either zero (or a negligible) effect of lowering crime, but what it WILL do is create more victims because they weren't allowed the means to protect themselves. What a pompous little fool this man is. 

[Displaced Texan 11,748]

23 minutes ago, Mrs. Peel said:

Even worse, his statements (and the whole bill) show a profound (and perhaps purposeful?) ignorance of the realities of crime. How can someone who knows so little about crime be the sponsor of a bill like this?   I could show you dozens of crime studies, all from credible sources - Fed, State, universities - and they ALL will show the same damn thing - ex-felons are committing on average about 70% of gun crimes (and other serious crimes too), then the 2nd largest group (another 15-20+% depending on the study) are people who also did something wrong previously (either they had a string of misdemeanors, or they got the gun illegally, etc.). Legal gun owners contribute a scant amount to crime - that's just a fact - most studies show that group to be in the single digits in terms of contributing to crime. They are statistically a non-issue.

A bill like this one also conveniently ignores that defensive gun uses in this country are measured (at minimum) in the hundreds of thousands, with some studies showing them to be in the millions.

So, when a nimrod politician like this is talking about what makes him feel "comfortable" - well, it just about makes my head explode. He's operating from a position of pure ignorance. The reality is that a law like this will have either zero (or a negligible) effect of lowering crime, but what it WILL do is create more victims because they weren't allowed the means to protect themselves. What a pompous little fool this man is. 

Y’all need to kick him to the curb 

[voyager9 3,434]

15 minutes ago, Displaced Texan said:

Y’all need to kick him to the curb 

Need to kick him in the nuts, but he ain’t got any.  

[Displaced Texan 11,748]

Just now, voyager9 said:

Need to kick him in the nuts, but he ain’t got any.  

Hence kicking him to the curb. 

[marlintag 223]

10 hours ago, crazyboy said:

Surely none for any of us that run weapons mounted lights, at least I have not seen one.  The Level 2 requirement, if it passes, is just another defacto ban by the anti gun liberals.  

Not a ban just another form of harassment and financial burden. This whole process has been a financial drain, guns, ammo, training, holsters (many), magazines, fees, etc. There trying to put us all in the streets.

12 hours ago, Carolina Native said:

Safariland 575

https://safariland.com/products/model-575-iwb-gls-pro-fit-holster-model_575

Oddly, enough i have one for the Sig 365/365xl for sale. 

[Bomber 1,091]

9 hours ago, Old Glock guy said:

In the videos, the bill's sponsor is asked repeatedly, "So where can people carry weapons?"  To which he replies, "I wouldn't feel comfortable having people carrying here, and I wouldn't feel comfortable having people carrying weapons there." 

You may not carry on train

You may not carry on plane 

You may not carry here nor there

You may not carry anywhere..

[Old Glock guy 1,127]

8 hours ago, Bomber said:

You may not carry on train

You may not carry on plane 

You may not carry here nor there

You may not carry anywhere..

Nicely done, Dr. S.!

[Walkinguf61 40]

I saw how the state PBA tried to get an exemption. These lawmakers just betrayed all the retired cops. Retired cops now have to “ out” themselves to potential cop haters? Do these lawmakers understand what cops and retired cops have to put up with or the threats we get? It’s not overt threats . Sometimes it’s just visine eye drops  in our drinks or extra spit in our food at restaurants.

[brucin 923]

On 10/22/2022 at 5:29 PM, b47356 said:

] an active or retired law enforcement officer in accordance with subsection f. of this section², to knowingly carry a weapon, as defined in subsection r. of N.J.S.2C:39-1, in any of the following places, including in or upon any part of the buildings, grounds, or parking area of:

If this means that they can carry in restaurants that serve alcohol while we can't F THAT NOISE. 

Law enforcement should only be able to carry while on duty if they want a law like this.

[brucin 923]

On 10/22/2022 at 7:34 PM, Displaced Texan said:

What a pompous little fool this man is. 

You are far to polite.

[JohnnyB 4,325]

14 hours ago, Old Glock guy said:

Nicely done, Dr. S.!

22 hours ago, Bomber said:

"You may not carry on train

You may not carry on plane 

You may not carry here nor there

You may not carry anywhere.."

 

[Walkinguf61 40]

1 hour ago, brucin said:

If this means that they can carry in restaurants that serve alcohol while we can't F THAT NOISE. 

Law enforcement should only be able to carry while on duty if they want a law like this.

Law enforcement does not want this law. The police union is trying to get exceptions for their active members and maybe, half heartedly get it for their retired ( non voting ) members. 
Most law enforcement do not want this law. Go look at the testimony of the PBA representative. He was scared to offend the bill sponsor because he was afraid of what else he would add to it and might not give his membership  any exemption to this ……..

[M1152 713]

THURSDAY: CARRY-KILLER BILL
MOVING IN BOTH SENATE COMMITTEE
AND FULL ASSEMBLY
 
Please Keep Contacting Legislators!

https://www.anjrpc.org/general/custom.asp?page=URGENTCarryKillerBillMovingThursday 

 

 

 

[Bushmaster1313 61]

On 10/21/2022 at 2:08 PM, marlintag said:

 

4. Some sensitive locations will remain, some will be shot down like private property and churches/synagogues/mosques etc.

Churches, synagogues and mosques are in the New York law  

Where are houses of worship called out in the New Jersey Bill?

[DirtyDigz 1,812]

34 minutes ago, Bushmaster1313 said:

Churches, synagogues and mosques are in the New York law  

Where are houses of worship called out in the New Jersey Bill?

They are not in the NJ bill, specifically, that I can find.

However there are several clauses in the NJ Bill that could be applied to houses of worship depending on the facilities/events:

"a school, college, university, or other educational institution and on any school bus;" - bible school

"  a child care facility or day care center;" - if church is providing child care/day care

"a privately or publicly owned and operated entertainment facility within this State, including but not limited to a theater, stadium, museum, arena, racetrack, or other place where performances, concerts, exhibits, games, or contests are held;" - Performances / Bingo games
 

In addition to the catch-all "private property".
 

[CMJeepster 2,778]

12 minutes ago, DirtyDigz said:

They are not in the NJ bill, specifically, that I can find.

However there are several clauses in the NJ Bill that could be applied to houses of worship depending on the facilities/events:

"a school, college, university, or other educational institution and on any school bus;" - bible school

"  a child care facility or day care center;" - if church is providing child care/day care

"a privately or publicly owned and operated entertainment facility within this State, including but not limited to a theater, stadium, museum, arena, racetrack, or other place where performances, concerts, exhibits, games, or contests are held;" - Performances / Bingo games
 

In addition to the catch-all "private property".
 

When are we gonna protest this shit?

[Mike77 169]

14 minutes ago, CMJeepster said:

When are we gonna protest this shit?

Now? 

[DirtyDigz 1,812]

31 minutes ago, CMJeepster said:

When are we gonna protest this shit?

My advice  - put more effort into getting out a Pro-2A vote in every NJ election rather than protesting.  They have  already shown multiple times that they DO NOT CARE what you think.

NJ (D) legislators really only react to 2 things - Something that hurts their wallet, or something that hurts their chances at re-election.